40 Analyzing Simple and Complex Negations in the Practice of Taking the Mind as the Path

Spring 2016 #40 Analyzing Simple and Complex Negations in the Practice of Taking the Mind as the Path.

Olaso.

So there’s a very simple distinction but a very important one made in buddhist philosophy, any good buddhist philosophy student is very familiar with it, just a couple of points here in this regard. In terms of the different types of phenomena that we are able to apprehend, to know, most of them, or many of them, probably most, are phenomena that we, that arise to us, they appear to us, they’re called affirmative, affirmative. So the color of Michelle’s cloak there, it arises, I see it, clear. And so many things are like that, right. The thoughts, the images, the desires, and emotions that arise in the space of the mind, there they are - we see them. But that’s not the only type of phenomena that we identify, that we know, there are also, negations. So there’s in my translations - there’s simple negations and complex negations. So as we’ll see later, we’ll get to this fairly soon, next week I imagine. We’ll get to the vipassana and as we did earlier, as with Bhikkuni Vajira, with Nagasena - is the chariot to be found in any of its individual parts? Is it there? A real chariot that’s really there from its own side. Is it to be in any of its individual parts? No. All of its parts assembled, is it really there from its own side? No. Apart from the parts, separate from the parts? Is there an independent chariot? No. So if you’re looking for the chariot as it exists from its own side and you examine it carefully and thoroughly, then you come to, it’s called thag bcad pa. Literally means to cut the rope. You come to a certain, definitive insight, or knowing and that is - it’s not there, it’s the sheer absence of a chariot from its own side. Existing there in its own parts or apart from that. The sheer absence of an inherently existent chariot.

And you stop. Just - not there. And an inherently existent chariot? No. So it’s a simple negation, a simple absence right? Of an inherently existent chariot. So in this room, is there, or is there not, an elephant? What would you say, Beatrice? Are you certain? If there were an elephant you would see it wouldn’t you? If, if there were, Diana, if there were, are there any gnats in the room? [answer - not that I can see, there might be] That’s a good answer, because they’re so small that they could be here and you wouldn’t find, you could, might be very thorough and say - I didn’t see one, but then you still wouldn’t be really sure, because they could be up there in the rafters. So you say - I just didn’t see one. But an elephant? Would you agree with Beatrice? You very certain? So you’re absolutely aware of a total absence of elephants in the room? [student responds] Alan - elephants, no elephants are you certain? [student replies - not that I can see. ] Alan Responds - oh you’re a wimp! [laughter]

What do you think there are miniature elephants that would escape your vision? [laughter] Buck up! I’m going to ask you again! Are there any elephants in the room? Let’s make it easy for you - grown adult elephants? Just in case you thought there were some really pigmy elephants around. Uh uh. [responds] Alan continues - it’s nice to hear that certainty isn’t it? [laughter] In Tibetan debate when you take a position, you take it with firmness, with decisiveness and if you’re wrong, you’re emphatically 100% flamboyantly wrong! It’s really good. And you go like, TSAAA! You don’t get smacked in the face but the person who shows you gets a really read back of the hand - TSAA! Like Whoa! Boy I’m wrong! It’s really helpful. There’s no waffling, there’s no fuzziness about it. So if you’re wrong about there being an elephant in the room you’re really flamboyantly wrong. But I agree with you, Beatrice wouldn’t, gave it away for me, I figured that out. So that’s a sheer absence, sheer absence.

[4:32] But then we have a treeless plain, a treeless plain, you can easily visualize that. But as you look out on the plain, and we might agree, very easy to do, is this or is this not a treeless plain? The answer would be - yeah. If there were a tree there I would see it, yes that is a treeless plain, but in knowing the treeless plain you have to know two things. You have to know with that same incisiveness, the total absence of trees on the plain, you have to know that if it’s a treeless plain. You have to know that. And you also have to know what a plain is and you have to be observing it. And a plain is something that does, like the color of Michelle’s shawl there, it’s something that appears, I can ascertain it, it has qualities, yeah, it’s not an absence, it’s a presence.

And so a treeless plain is a complex negation, it’s negating trees, but affirming plain, okay? It turns out to be a very important distinction, a lot of debates, a lot of philosophy has been written about this in the Indo-Tibetan Buddhist tradition. But we’re going to make it really practical really quickly. So, then what is the object of mindfulness in this practice of taking the mind as the path? What is the object of mindfulness? What are we attending to? Space of the Mind? If this were on a grading scale you’d get a C, because it’s only half right. Paula, what is the object of mindfulness in this practice? It’s a lovely smile but I need more than that. [laughter] I just told her she got a C, all you want is a C? An A is the best grade. And I just gave her a C. Are you striving for a C or do you just like mediocre? Danielle? [student responds] Space of the mind and appearances that arise in the mind, or just rephrasing it - space of the mind and whatever arises in this space, right? Those two, that’s why it’s only half correct. You have to say not only space of the mind, because you could be just focusing on the space of the mind and not notice what arises in it. Say - I’m looking at the space of the mind, what’s the problem? The words are important here. So of course you know I’m kidding you about the grading, but the getting, conceptually the right answer is important because the concepts, the instructions are guiding us in the practice. If I were leading a wagon train, if I were you know, like in the old days going to the West Coast you know, then I would have to be able to guide you step by step by step. You would have to know, somebody would have to know where we’re going, right? And that’s this, this is called [Tibetan 7:24] guidance in meditation. It’s very much like taking people on an expedition or on a wagon train across this long long trail to get to the West Coast, right.

[7:34] So this means, but this, for that, when people give you instructions you have to have a clear intellectual understanding. If somebody gives you instructions you have to know what they said and you have to bear it in mind and only then can you follow the instructions. If they said - take two lefts, two rights and then one left, and if you said yeah, more or less lefts and rights, that’s what he said [laughter] that’s just intellectual, I don’t do that. [laughter] Well, that’s not going to work out too well.

So, now to come right to the point. So we have, there it is, so now we have a clear articulation, we are attending to the space of the mind and whatever arises within that space or that domain. But as we all know on occasion as we attend to the space of the mind, and whatever arises in it, sometimes there just doesn’t seem to be anything arising in it. Okay? So here’s a question, and I don’t want you to answer it now, but I want you to attend so closely that by the end of this session you’ll be able to answer it. Not definitively, absolutely perhaps, but you should really be able to have an informed answer.

And that is - when you’re, you’re focused there, so you know you’re focused, you’re not just kind of roaming around the six domains, you’re in one domain, not perfectly, not with great continuity, but you know what it’s like to be focused on one domain - the mental, because that’s the only one we’re giving attention to, right? When you’re focusing there, and you are aware that you’re focusing on the space of the mind and then thoughts, images come up, so now you’re attending to - appearances that arise in the space of the mind. Then during those intervals, there are bound to be some intervals, when, as closely as you’re attending, you just don’t see anything coming up, you’re looking out on the plain and you just don’t see any trees, or trees don’t move, so maybe a, a buffalo-less plain. You know, a plain with no buffaloes, okay. Maybe it’s a plain where there are buffaloes sometimes and then not at other times, and buffalo is a big animal, like a, like an elephant, so if there were a buffalo there you would see it, okay? Well, if you’re attending to a plain and whatever buffaloes arise on it then when there are no buffaloes you’re still seeing something, like the color of Michelle’s shawl, you’re seeing something plain, and you can describe it. Is it completely flat? Is it you know, does it have grass, does it have shrubs, does it have cactus? And so forth and so on, you know, does it have rocks does it have humps and so forth, right. So you can talk a lot about the plain but there’s not a lot to talk about in terms of no buffaloes. How many ways do you want to talk about that? No buffalo, total absence of buffalo, zero buffaloes [laughter] hm hm buffaloes, you know [laughter] whatever you know, it’s really, there’s just nothing, that’s all there is to it - no buffalo.

So we’re getting to the point here. The space of the mind, is it a sheer absence as in the absence, the emptiness of a chariot, existent from its side? And as soon as you know that, there’s nothing more to see, you just know - absence - not there. Is it like that? Is the space of the mind a sheer absence of appearances? That’s the question, is the space of the mind a sheer absence of appearances? Like a sheer absence of buffalo? Sheer absence of an inherently existent chariot, is it like that? Or is the space of the mind more like a plain, which has its own characteristics, with or without buffalo? Is the space of the mind its own domain, is it something that is there, that has its own characteristics whether or not there’s anything else appearing in the space of the mind? Okay, very clear yes? Okay good. So this is for you to determine. And just don’t try to, you know, think about what you’ve read in different books and so forth, about what’s, I’m sure there’s a right answer here and who told me the right answer - that’s not it. Just look. Because my words here I think - quite clear. See for yourself the space of the mind. Is it a sheer absence of any appearances whatsoever or is it more like a plain that is sometimes has appearances arising in it and sometimes doesn’t but even when it doesn’t it has its own qualities? So that’s the question, okay?

So I’d like this session again to be silent. It’s nice not to have to multitask, going back and forth between my voice and the practice.

So settle body, speech and mind. Spend a few minutes as you wish in the mindfulness of breathing. For as long as you feel okay, until you feel - okay things are calming down I think I’m ready to focus. And then with your eyes at least partially open, as you’ve heard so many times before, focus your attention on the space of the mind - whatever arises in it - observe the appearances that do arise, and then take special interest in those intervals between the occurrences of distinct events taking place in the space of the mind. Examine closely. Whether you’re seeing a sheer absence of appearances - a simple negation. Or whether you’re seeing an actual space that has its own characteristics. If there is an actual space, that it’s showing its own characteristics as an affirmative, a presence of something, then you should be able to say something, maybe even a lot about what are the attributes of the space of the mind. There is nothing to say about the absence of buffaloes, as I’ve said. You don’t, there’s, it’s just absence of buffaloes, so that’s it, there’s nothing more to say, right. But a buffalo-less plain you can talk about that for a long time, all an affirmative quality, just one negation, no buffaloes but besides that - oh it has - you know, other attributes.

Okay, let’s go in, it will be a silent session. And be prepared to report.

[13:46] Meditation is silent.

Discussion continues.

So very simple question. Space of the mind. Is it a simple negation, a sheer absence of appearances, or when there’s nothing happening in that space, so to speak, is it a complex negation, in the sense that there are no appearances but there is something that is called - space of the mind - which has its own attributes? So how many would say it’s just a sheer absence of appearances? Just please raise your hand, how many? Just sheer absence of appearances? Boy if anybody thinks there is a sheer absence, you’re completely overwhelmed, right. So for people listening by podcast, not a single hand went up. Which means now these people here have a real problem. [laughter] Because this means if you’re quite sure, I mean that was like no hands, I saw an absence of hands going up [laughter] for the podcast people. If there was a hand went up I would have seen it. So I saw a sheer absence of hands going up, I’m very certain of that. But this means if they’d all raised their hands their job would have been done, but since their hands remained down, now their work just begins.

And that is - alright then, everybody here agrees, that’s unique. I didn’t expect that, unanimous. Glen wasn’t giving you signals was he? [laughter] You weren’t passing notes? I had my eyes down. [laughter] We all agree let’s do this in a group? [laughter]

So now your work begins. You’re saying alright, it’s more like a treeless plain, so then this leads me to yet more questions. And so I will ask, oh, I will ask Kathy. Kathy if it’s, since it’s a complex negation this means just as you can say there are no trees in the plain but the plain is brown, it’s green, it has grass, it has etc etc. Please tell me one attribute of the space of the mind that you observed when you looked. [responds ] full? okay full is one of those words if I say if this glass had no water and I said it’s full then you’d, then what would you ask? [responds - ] full of things? Is this glass about to be filled with gold, like about 10 million dollars worth of gold? No it’s not. Is it about to be filled with lemonade? No? How do you know? [laughter] probably not, yeah. So, because when you say it’s about to be filled then it kinda like begs the question - filled with what? [student responds] Alan continues - is this something that you’re observing or something you’re conceptually imputing? Projecting? [student responds] Allen continues - I think you probably are, yeah, and it’s a valid projection - to say that something is projected isn’t mean that one is stupid or that one is hallucinating or something, so you’re exactly right - sure that space does have that capacity, there is the potential there, there’s a great likelihood during those intervals that shortly something’s going to appear there. That’s a true statement but this is a conceptual projection isn’t it? Yeah. And what I’m asking for - so that was good, so that clarified some things but now you see the question gets tougher and that is - what did you observe? Not what did you - this whole issue of signals and noise, but what did you observe opposed to what you superimposed? So what did you observe, what was given to you, what did you perceive, what had appeared? Kirsty? [ Kirsty responds.] Alan asks - that was in the nature of space itself? While you’re attending to the space was there a quality of knowing, and the answer is yes, for sure, absolutely right, but if I should look at you and somebody said - Alan please describe Kirsty and I said - she has a quality of knowing, well you do but that’s not something I observed. If you said Alan when you’re looking at this glass what do you see? - it has a quality of knowing, would you agree with that? Does the glass have a quality of knowing? No. When I am looking at the glass I have a quality of knowing, I am seeing the glass and I’m aware that I am seeing the glass, that’s true. So does the space of mind have a quality of knowing or is that something rather you bring to your experience of the space of the mind?

[18:37] Ding ding ding ding ding ding [laughter] go ahead and be wrong, or be right, either way but what would you say? You’ve seen Tibetan monks debating haven’t you? Have you ever seen them go like [laughter] they never do that, they give a snappy answer, it they’re wrong they’re wrong. And - TSAA!! So what do you say? Snap snap chop chop. [student speaks] Clear in what sense, okay that’s good, now that’s something I can really, that’s okay, and now, and I would just like to know, because you know, imagine I really don’t have a clue myself, maybe I don’t. Clear is a word I understand, but it has different meanings. So like the meaning of a sentence is clear but the sky is clear, so clearly those two words - clear - have different meaning, right.

So what do you mean then? I’m not refuting you at all but I would like for more precision. when you say the space of the mind is clear, in what sense of the term? [student responds] Alan says - that’s a lot, ok that’s good enough, we’re not finished but that’s a good start. Doesn’t have shape, doesn’t have color, doesn’t have boundaries. Okay that’s a lot isn’t it? These are all negative qualities but you can, what about the absence of an elephant? Is that devoid of shape, devoid of color, devoid of boundaries? HA! But the absence of an elephant is a simple negation isn’t it? But you had your hand down, suggesting that the space of the mind is a complex negation, right? So then you would need to give it positive attribute, like the plain is brown. A quality that a sheer absence doesn’t have. A sheer absence of elephants doesn’t have lilacs. There are no lilacs in the absence of an elephant but it’s still a simple negation. So a positive attribute. Did you see any positive attributes, something that actually appeared to you? This is a slow debate. [laughter] It’s tough, go ahead, it’s tough. [ student responds] Alan continues - yeah probably, good, but this was useful, useful conversation, good. Brendon what’s up? But again this is kind of like a debate, in a sense, and there’s a lot of value in the Tibetan style of debate because it’s so crisp. So I’m asking a very crisp question. I have not said - please write me a poem about your feelings when you’re experiencing, - and like well it kinda reminded me of the Sonoran desert when I was there in the spring, it was kind of [laughter] - not like that.

[22:12] So when you observe, but now I want a crisp and [ student responds ] yeah not today you’re not, today you’re in the witness booth. What did you witness when you observed the space of the mind in terms of a positive attribute that came to your mind and you knew it? [student responds] No, no that was not my question, [laughter] whether you agree with her or not, is like - I don’t care. I just asked the question can you answer it? What did you see when you observed the space of the mind, did you see any positive attributes that came to mind? [student responds] No that’s not my question, and I’m not going to saying what it’s like. It’s kind of like lilacs but that really doesn’t tell me much. What did you see? [student responds] you saw potential energy? What on earth does that look like? [ laughter] It sounds like, like you and Kathy should get into kahoots, I saw potential energy like there was something about to happen but it wasn’t happening yet. [student] it’s kind of like, but I don’t need to like, I want to know what did you see? When I look at you you’re kind of like your brother but not the same. That doesn’t tell anybody anything because you don’t know what his brother looks like.

Yeah. Mary-kay, what did you see? Everybody had their hands down so you must have seen something. [laughter] [student responds] Expectation that’s a quality of space? [student responds] that’s a quality of space? But isn’t that a quality of your mind like Kirstie? A quality of expectation, that’s a quality of what you bring to the space. [student responds] You’re reporting, you’re answering questions that I didn’t ask? I didn’t say what were your feelings when you attended the space of the mind, did you kinda feel - I like this, or? [laughter] no I’m asking what you saw? What appeared to your mind [ student responds that she only thinks in words so ] well I don’t think that’s true, what color is a lemon? You don’t need to tell me because something came to mind and it wasn’t the word. Isn’t it true. When I said Lemon you didn’t say L E M O N [laughter] a lemon came to mind, right? what color was it? green? That’s possible yeah, she likes unripe lemons, I’m not going to dispute that, it could be brown like a really rotten lemon you know, like you just saw in the garbage dump, ugg brown lemon. [laughter] But you know you’re flirting with me but I just want you to be, I don’t mean sexually, [laughter] I don’t mean anything like that at all, no that’s not happening, but I would like you to just straight answer, when you observe the mind what did you see? [student responds] you saw and idea? you SAW an idea? What did it look like? You HAD an idea? Like Kathy had an idea and Kirsty had an experience. an awareness? But I want to know what you saw, not what you had. [student responds] Boundlessness? That’s an absence again. A boundless, I mean it’s not a wrong answer but the space, but the absence of elephants one could say, well it’s just like - no elephants anywhere - an absence of elephants but it’s still a simple negation.

[25:51] But you by your hand being put down, by your hand not rising, you said it was a complex negation. Who’s going to help me out here, Gyatche you’ve been around for a long time? You’ve studied this stuff. So? And you can’t be like the Bhikkhu Vijira that said - oh you’re making my hair stand on end. [laughter] I thought really that, how much hair did that nun have? To make her hair stand on end - oh look Gyatche’s hair is standing on end. [laughter] So Gyatche, my old friend what did you see when you saw the space of the mind? What quality, one quality that it has that you’re not simply bringing to it, projecting on it. What quality did it have? [student responds]

See? You can use any word you like, but a quality of IT not of what you are bringing to it. [student responds] Yeah and what’s the appearance, what is when you looked at the space of the mind, what appeared, what quality? You’re saying the space of mind is like a plain, a plain has a lot of qualities, how big is it, the color, how flat is it and so forth? Tell me one quality of the space of the mind? Unobstructive-ness - it’s a negative quality but I think that, I think that rings a bell, that means something doesn’t it? Does it jive with your experience? Daniel does it jive with your experience? [responds] Unobstructive, can you explain it to him? Because not everybody here is a native English speaker and it’s, it was a good choice, but, this is good then, explain for everybody here, a lot of people listening by podcast, they’re in Russia in Brazil and so forth, Unobstructedness - it’s an abstract, it’s taking an adjective and turning it into a noun. Unobstructed -ness. So what does that look like, what are you referring to, can you put it in simple English that everybody can understand who understands English but maybe not this more abstract language.

[28:07] [student responds] Doesn’t stop? Was it going? It’s just going going going? like a little [student responds] What’s that? It doesn’t impede what? [laughter] whatever? That could have been the answer altogether. [laughter] what are the qualities? - whatever [laughter] I enjoyed that one. I mean it’s the teenage thing you know you have to put the mudra - whatever [ laughter ] [student continues] but this is all negative, a plain has qualities you can see, and so absence of this absence of that, absence of that, but that’s true also of an absence of an elephant. What’s that? [student responds] yeah but you can explain that, what, what, it’s kinda like empirical, that sounds more like abstract noun. Openness. No boundaries. Is that what you mean? The concern here is that you might be, you know, because you’ve studied Buddhist philosophy, so you know the definition of non composite space, it’s unobstructiveness - unimpededness - that’s the definition. But, you’ve got a problem there - if you’re drawing on your knowledge, your past knowledge of buddhist studies, Glenn, space that is defined as unobstructedness - absence of impediment is that permanent of impermanent? [permanent] Is it a complex negation or a simple negation? simple negation, yeah. He nailed it. So it’s now the space of mind a simple negation? A mere absence of obstructiveness? So what’s more? Don’t tell me something positive.

Yawns [laughter] okay, so I’m finished with ya. For now. You need to go off and have meetings. But look again, look again. And you can always change your mind. And you know the whole point here is I’m being a bit of humor just because that should be the tone. There never was sarcasm here, never any intention whatsoever to put anybody down. But in debate this happens, this is what we do, I was trained in it for years, this is what we do. We bring lightness to it, we bring quickness to it and we make humor to it, and it wakes the mind up, it makes the mind fresh and lively, frisky like a puppy, right. And that’s good, and then it gets the attention up, it’s designed to bring about vividness, acuity, clarity, sharpness. You make a mistake, I mean you just make a mistake like - okay I made a mistake, and you move right on you don’t linger, like oh I got a C. I don’t want a C [laughter] my parents will find out I got a C. I don’t want a C, I’m a C person. Oh oh. [laughter] Thank you for laughing, it’s exactly right, because it’s just light you know, it’s supposed to be enjoyable. And it is, a really good debate. I’ve seen some that are about as heavy as a dump truck bogged down in mud, that’s no fun at all. It’s heavy, ponderous, sluggish, ugh. But I’ve also seen, participated in debates that are lively, crisp, fresh. And when you make a mistake you laugh and you move right on. Good training, good training.

[31:52] So the question lingers and Glenn will be grilling you later, you know. What comes to mind, just for fun, but what comes to mind if it’s not a simple negation, a simple absence. Kristy made a very important point, and it’s true of experience that there is an affirmative experience of being aware of that space. That’s true, that’s important. We’ll get to that later.

But what you’re aware of, the object, we have the subject and the object, the subject has that quality of, a sense of potential, that’s true. That’s intelligent, that’s true, I have a sense that this is a field in which things can happen, because they have, and as they did in the past they will likely in the future. That’s true! It’s not something you’re observing but it’s a quality of your discerning intelligence as you attend to, that it’s, that you’re, how do you say, that you’re aware, that you’re clear and you have a sense - there’s potential there. But it’s conceptual imputation. Whereas when I just gaze, I just open my eyes and gaze at Michelle’s cloak there, her shawl, just seen. In the seen there’s just the seen. So that’s what I want you to do, when you attend to the space of the mind, in the mentally seen, let there be just the mentally seen and report what you saw. Okay? Okay, enjoy then. That should be fine.

Olaso See you this afternoon.

Transcribed by Cheri Langston

Revised by Rafael Carlos Giusti

Final edition by Kriss Sprinkle

Discussion

Ask questions about this lecture on the Buddhism Stack Exchange or the Students of Alan Wallace Facebook Group. Please include this lecture’s URL when you post.